pages: CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2005-08-02 | 5 | apply to ARRA and the CIC. Mayor Johnson stated that she concurred with Councilmember Matarresei some language should not be included in the resolution; the purpose of the resolution is to delegate authority under the Charter; procedural issues should be in a separate document and should be removed [from the resolution] that she was not clear on the $35,000 threshold; the resolution states that the City Attorney has the authority to spend $35,000 on any chase and does not come to the Council until $35,000 is spent, which was not what Council intended. Councilmember deHaan stated the intent was that the City Attorney would advise the Council of the approximate cost of the case; if the case would reach the $35,000 threshold, it would definitely have to come to the Council. Councilmember Matarrese stated the resolution is not to limit spending, rather it defines when the Council's Charter authority is delegated small consultations that amount to a couple thousand dollars should not come to the Council and authority is delegated; $35,000 was an order of magnitude when there would be a significant impact on the City's liability or a significant amount of money would be spent and the Council's authority would not be delegated. Mayor Johnson stated that she recalled that if the anticipated legal costs would be more than $35,000, than the matter would come to Council, however the City Attorney could spend money on the interim until the matter comes to the Council. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she recalled that the $35,000 threshold had a couple of caveats; the matter would come to Council if there were policy questions or if there were potentially large ramifications no matter how much or small of an amount would be spent if there were a matter that Councilmembers wanted to ask questions about, Councilmembers have the option to have the matter brought to Council. Councilmember Matarrese stated said directions are work product and performance issues, not a question of delegating authority the Council is trying to identify a point when the Council delegates authority to the City Attorney and when Council retains authority; something of extreme importance might cost less than $35,000 and the City Council might want to retain its authority on the engagement of outside counsel; the question is of delegation, not limits on spending; the intent is to define the delegation. Mayor Johnson stated that she interpreted that the intent of the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 5 August 2, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf |